Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Media statement
by DAP ADUN for Kampung Tunku Lau Weng San on 28th October 2015 in
Petaling Jaya:

I would like to refer to
Clause 41 of the Standing Orders of Petaling Jaya City Council 2007 which reads
as below:

“41. Any Councillor who has any
interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or proposed contrat or other
matter, is present at the ordinary meeting or special meeting, or of any
committee thereof at which the contract or other matter is the subject of
consideration, he shall as soon as possible after the commencement thereof,
shall disclose the fact, and shall withdraw from the meeting while the contract
or matter is under consideration and shall be precluded from voting”

I raise this point in relation
to a decision made by the Petaling Jaya Mayor on 20th October 2015.
Mayor Mohd Azizi Mohd Zain told the press that the decision was made because
majority of the councillors supporting the decision to reopen the old bazaar at
Jalan SS 9A/13 while retaining the new one at Jalan SS 9A/12.

I am now questioning if there
is a genuine majority even if the memorandum was signed by 12 Councillors (9
from PKR and 3 from PAS). It is public knowledge now that the group objected to
the relocation is led by one Saminathan a/l Kitchan, a person who holds PKR
divisional position in Kelana Jaya.

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Update on Sungai Way Deepavali Bazaar - Many armchair critics have mentioned that the new site was not agreed upon by the committee of Sri Sakti Eashwary Temple. The mayor was quoted in a news report that one of the reason why he allows the old site at Jalan SS 9A/13 to be reopened was because of the disagreement from the temple.

Councillor Mr Sean Oon​, had actually spoken to the Secretary of the temple and discussed over the idea of having the Deepavali bazaar at Jalan SS 9A/12. There was no such disagreement recorded to him. There were some issues when some of the "petak" were drawn too close to the entrance. Therefore the council had redrawn the shifted the "petak" further away from the entrance of the temple.

That is also the reason why we see road marking in black used to cover the earlier road marking. We should have documented the conversation or meeting with the rightful representative from the temple (though the parking lots outside the temple are the council's property). We did not do it. It was a mistake.

Media statement (2) by DAP ADUN for Kampung Tunku Lau Weng San on 20th October 2015 in Petaling Jaya:

1.On behalf of residents, villagers and businessmen, especially those who stays or works at Jalan SS 9A/13, together with the JKKK Seri Setia, we are extremely upset by this decision. They also felt betrayed by the government of the day.

2.We are also deeply disappointed and frustrated that the aspirations and wishes of the local people are not respected and upheld, particularly those who had signed a petition to the Mayor on 30th September, not to forget all the recorded and unrecorded complaints lodged by the villagers over the years.

3.The sharp reversal shows that the reasons, evidences, documents, photos, minutes of meetings, facts and figures that we have presented do not worth any consideration at all. We DID NOT stop the bazaar. We merely relocate them. Many people/politicians are still commenting as if we are stopping everything in Sungai Way.

4.We are also deeply disappointed and frustrated that proper procedure has not been followed in reversing the earlier decision of the council. Since this is a decision of the council, therefore the council needs to call for a special meeting and pass a resolution to be later endorsed at the fullboard meeting in order to reverse it.

5.Unfortunately, these are not done, therefore the decision made is procedurally wrong and unfair and can be challenged in court via judicial review. Even PKR MP for Subang Sivarasa Rasiah has asked the decision to be discussed by the councillors. I believe, if the MB has to make a decision, this is the likely decision or instruction he will make or give. In fact, being part of the government, there is no need for them to send memorandum to their own government. We are becoming a big laughing stock to the world.

6.That a very bad precedence and a very wrong signal has been created. Such hapening should not have happened in a state run by opposition parties whose aspiration is to take over the leadership at the Federal level. In fact, this is bad governance. It will be very difficult for any public officers to run the council because a decision made (based on reasons, evidences, documents, photos, minutes of meetings, facts and figures) can be easily reversed.

7.With this sharp reversal, does this mean the council can make a decision in your favour:

a.so long so you can win a shouting match even though you are shouting in front of a Hindu temple?

b.so long so you can get enough people (even if you have to ferry them via buses from elsewhere) to harass the poor Indian hawkers at Jalan SS 9A/12, completely ignoring the wishes of the locals?

c.so long so you can arm-twist the councillors and subsequently public officers to reverse any decisions to your favour?

d.so long so you can get other ADUNs and MPs outside a particular constituency who may have immediate access to the state authority to interfere?

8.If this is the message we are signalling to the general public, then how are we going to ask taxpayers to follow the law? How are we going to invite foreign investor and convince the business sector that we mean business each time we made a decision? Where is the spirit of rule of law?

9.I am shocked and surprised that the memorandum was also signed by three PAS councillors. PAS being a party not involved at all in this incident, there was no courtesy to even inform me the reason they wanted to sign the memorandum. After reading the memorandum, I have called and sent text messages to Azri Mohamed Arish, a PAS councillor who had attended a meeting in 2014 on this matter and had at that point of time proposed the relocation. My calls was not answered and my message was not replied. This is not professional. This is a blatant betrayal. I am still waiting and hoping for his reply.

10.I would like to distance myself from this decision. I thank my constituents for showing their concern or supports. I thank outsiders who were not carried away by emotion and cared to check out the truth themselves.

11.I thank all those Indian hawkers who have already started business in Jalan SS 9A/12, I promise you all that I will do my very best to help the business there. I believe we are on the right side. Deepavali is a celebration of victory against falsehoods.

Media statement by DAP ADUN for Kampung Tunku Lau Weng San on 20th October 2015 in Petaling Jaya:

1. I have the benefit of reading statements issued by my colleague in DAP, ie. Sdr Tony Pua, MP for Petaling Jaya Utara, Sdr Sean Oon, Petaling Jaya Councillor for Zone 20 (which includes SS 9A) and Sdr Rajiv, ADUN for Bukit Gasing. I have also read statement from Mr. Sivarasa Rasiah, PKR MP for Subang. I also have the opportunity to read most of the postings by my colleagues in the DAP on their social media websites as well as the accompanying comments. Since my name is mentioned in Mr. Sivarasa’s statement, therefore I should also respond to the various suggestions he had put up.

2. Mr Sivarasa had said the following and I quote: “My advice to both YB Lau and YB Pua is that such matters are best left to the best judgment of the Datuk Bandar of Petaling Jaya and his councillors. We should not interfere unless the decisions made at MBPJ are clearly unreasonable or obviously wrong or against stated policies of the Pakatan coalition.”

3. Although MP and ADUNs seldom interfere in the decision-making process of the council, we are however answerable to the people and are held responsible to any decisions made by the council. MPs and ADUNs in Selangor have from time to time participated in the decision-making process too.

4. Mr Sivarasa himself had also requested the council to revoke proposed amendments in RTPJ, approximately one year ago in which Sdr Tony Pua and I were also joining Mr Sivarasa in signing off the press statement[i]. Therefore, it is not necessary true that MP and ADUN cannot interfere in the decision-making process, in fact we can so long so it is done with merits and is justified.

5. Mr Sivarasa’s statement also draw my attention when he said that "Keadilan is not aware of any specific complaints to MBPJ or police reports made by traders in the Sg Way Deepavali bazaar in the years since Pakatan took over in 2008..."

6. I wish to remind him, that it 2014, we had a very lengthy telephone conversation over the same matter in which I took the pain and explained to him the background information and the various solutions that had been considered. I am not duty bound to do that as the issue is a local issue and priority should be given to the views and stands of the local elected representatives.

7. I was similarly attracted to Mr Sivarasa’s statement that "when one insistently waves the proverbial red flag at an angry bull, it is naive to expect the bull to sit patiently and watch." I wish to inform Mr Sivarasa that event on 15th October was an evening walkabout around the new site. Mr Saminathan, who has been insisting to retain at the old place, and his friends are not invited to this event.

8. My final point to raise is about a statement from Mr Sivarasa which says that "DAP is now again in a formal coalition with Keadilan and Amanah...we must therefore manage complaints about one another's members in the spirit of coalition building." I find this most amusing as until today, following the open remarks by the Selangor Mentri Besar Azmin Ali a few weeks ago that Pakatan Harapan does not operate in Selangor, many members of the public and I are unable to figure out if Pakatan Harapan is officially formed or not. Therefore, I would like to suggest to Mr Sivarasa that until and unless PKR is putting up a strong stand on this matter, his sentence carries no weight.

9. For outsiders who are interested and have commented on this issue, I wish they could also take the pain to read all the documents posted in our social media and iron out the details for themselves.

10. Mr Saminathan had attended the first meeting in 2010 and was informed of the proposal to relocate to Jalan SS 9A/12. He disagreed and the council gave in. In return, he agreed to sign an Akujanji. The terms and conditions were laid out clearly. He failed to follow since then until 2014 when the amount of complaints accumulated. Throughout the months of September and October 2014, various meeting had been held to discuss the problems caused by the traders of the Deepavali Bazaar in Jalan SS 9A/13. A second technical meeting was subsequently called by the council in which it has decided to relocate the bazaar.

11. Interestingly, the meeting was chaired by one councilor named Suriase a/l Gengiah from PKR, who serves as councilor in charge of PJU 8 (Damansara Perdana), PJU 9 (Bandar Sri Damansara) and PJU 10 (Damansara Damai) (These are located under DUN Bukit Lanjan and Parliament Subang – both seats were held by PKR). Therefore the proximate relation between Mr Suriase and Mr Sivarasa is established.

12. The second councilor who attended the meeting in 2014 is Azri Mohamed Arish from PAS, also a councilor serving for SS 8, SS 9 and SS 10 (These are also located under two PKR-held seats: DUN Seri Setia and Parliament Kelana Jaya). Based on the minutes of meeting, Mr Azri proposed the relocation. Mr Suriase as the chairman of the technical meeting did not object to it.

13. The results of the meeting was subsequently brought to the attention of the council’s Committee of Business and Health Control in its meetings in March and April 2015. The meetings were attended by councilor from PAS, PKR and DAP. Mr Sean Oon was the one who raised the needs to inform Mr Saminathan as early as possible for them to prepare for the necessaries. Based on the record, all councilors had unianimously agreed to the relocation despite objection from Mr Saminathan. The fact remains that Mr Saminathan had already been informed at least six months before Deepavali, not to mention the countless official and unofficial meetings held in 2010 and 2014 on the matter. Therefore the question of inadequate notice to Mr Saminathan does not arise.

14. Some are advocating a win-win solution, ie maintaining two Deepavali Bazaars in Sungai Way and only relocate in 2016. I wish to inform that such win-win solution was already proposed before but was never heeded by Mr Saminathan with good faith. MBPJ had given in by allowing them to occupy the place every year until 2014. The Akujanji signed by Mr Saminathan is just a piece of meaningless paper when they do not give meaning to it by following the terms and conditions as laid out in the Akujanji.

15. There are also those who question the suitability of the new site at Jalan SS 9A/12 when the management of Sri Sakti Easwary Temple also objected to the relocation. The bulk of the complaint actually is not the Deepavali Bazaar, but the weekly night market, which is much bigger than the Deepavali Bazaar. If the temple has problems with the Deepavali Bazaar, I am sure that they will have a bigger problem with the weekly night market. Will MBPJ relocate the night market? I believe this is the last resort if all other solutions have failed to overcome or mitigate the problem.

16. For those who criticize us by bringing examples in SS 2 morning market, durian stalls and market in Section 17 in which each of these markets have different characteristics and solutions. Let’s compare an apple with an apple. Traffic congestion in SS 2 and Section 17 markets were largely caused by two reasons: double-parked vehicles and the lack of a permanent structure to house a morning market.

17. The good thing about SS 2 and Section 17 is these are part of the modern Petaling Jaya with proper planning and infrastructure in place. Sungai Way New Village does not have such luxury. Durian stalls in SS 2 were originally squatting at road side and private lands. Relocation to Section 19 is unavoidable. Stall owners initially refused to follow rules and regulations and MBPJ even went ahead temporarily suspended their licenses. Again, the issue of racial biasness when comes to enforcing law and orders does not arise.

18. For those who sympathize the fate of Mr Saminathan and his friends, I urge them to also sympathise the residents, villagers and traders from the area. I also urge them to see the facts that MBPJ and the local community has been tolerating the inconveniences for years.

19. It cannot be right when on one hand we keep asking them to continue to tolerate and on the other hand Mr Samithan and his friends have done barely nothing to improve the situation. This is not how a win-win solution should work. We must strike a balance. The council was right in relocating the bazaar, something which can be avoided have Mr Saminathan and his friends cooperate with the council right from the beginning.

Saturday, October 17, 2015

More update on Sungai Way Deepavali Bazaar - a real hawker named Balakrishnan had spoken up on behalf of those who want to do business at the new place. To those who commented on this issue without the necessary backgroup knowledge, this should not be missed. By the way, I managed to verify that Mr. Balakrishnan is a voter in DUN Kampung Tunku.

Deepavali Bazaar in Sungai Way - These are the two minutes of meeting that I am still keeping in my old archive, one in year 2010 and another in 2014.

Complaints started coming in in 2009 which prompted me to interfere in 2010 and subsequently lay down the conditions, which the hawkers had agreed to follow.

in 2014, after several years of failure in resolving the problems, the council was prompted to meet another time to resolve the issue. Interestingly, it was noted in that meeting in para 2.8 that one Mr Samy wanted to "represent" the traders to apply for the licenses.

There are also several paragraphs which I have marked for your reading. Apparently, there are additional (stricter) conditions that they have to follow. One of them is that the council has the right to revoke their licenses and take legal action against them should any hawkers violate rules and regulations laid down by the council.

The issue of biasness does not arise in this meeting because neither me, Mr Sean Oon​ nor Tony Pua​ attended this meeting. Interestingly, this meeting was attended by two non-DAP MBPJ Councillors and it was chaired by an Indian Councillor from PKR. I am aware that he is still serving in the same position.

The conclusion are: The problems that we are elaborating does not happen yesterday. It happens years ago. Meetings had been held, relocation were proposed as early as in 2010. The hawkers disagreed. Conditions were imposed but were broken year-in-year-out to the extend that a meeting had to be held in 2014. Stricter conditions were imposed which gives the power to MBPJ to revoke licenses and charge lawbreakers to the court.

If we are so racists, inhumane, so ce****a, we would not have given a full five years to Mr Saminathan and his "friends" to do business in the old place.

We would not even have to close both eyes on all the rules and regulations they had broken. We would not even care if Mr Saminathan has got one license for his wife and another one for his 22-year old son.

The reason of me posting up these documents is very simple - many people are commenting without the necessary background information - some may choose to ignore these information and prefer to go by their emotions, while some do not even bother to ask me about this.

Let's be straight and honest in carrying out our duties as politicians! What say you?

Monday, October 05, 2015

I think the following letter can serve as a good guideline for us elected representatives in Selangor and across the causeway to benchmark upon, and for the general populace to evaluate our performance.

It is a tradition for the Prime Minister to send a letter on “Rules of Prudence” to all the PAP MPs after an election. The context each time may be different but the subject remains constant, because integrity, honesty and incorruptibility are fundamental to our Party. We must never tire of reminding ourselves of their importance.

2. Our Party has won 83 out of 89 seats in the just concluded General Election, with all seats contested. Overall, the PAP won 69.9% of the votes.

3. The people have endorsed what we have done in the previous term, and given us a clear mandate to take Singapore forward beyond SG50. Now we must fulfil what we have promised to do in our manifesto. We must never break faith with the people, but must always carry out our duties to them responsibly, address their worries and advance their interests.

4. Be humble in victory. As MPs, always remember we are servants of the people, not masters. Do not mistake the strong election result to mean that our efforts have succeeded, and that we can afford to slacken. Much work remains to be done tackling issues which concern Singaporeans, and finding new ways to improve people’s lives. Listen hard to voter concerns, help them to tackle pressing needs, and convey their worries and aspirations to the Government. Persuade them to support policies which are in their own long term benefit, while helping the Government to formulate good policies and stay in close touch with the people.

UPHOLDING OUR REPUTATION AND INTEGRITY

5. One vital factor that has enabled the PAP to retain the trust of Singaporeans all these years is honesty and integrity. The PAP’s reputation for clean, incorruptible government is one of our most precious assets. As PAP MPs, your personal standing reflects this high standing of the Party as a whole. I cannot stress strongly enough that every MP must uphold the rigorous standards that we have set for ourselves, and do nothing to compromise them. Never give cause for allegations that you are misusing your position, especially your access to Ministers. That would discredit both you and the Party.

6. As MPs, you will come across many different sorts of people. Many altruistic, public spirited individuals will help you without wanting anything in return, spending time and money to get community projects going and to serve residents. But a few will cultivate you to obtain benefits for themselves or their companies, to gain respectability by association with you, or to get you to influence ministries and statutory boards to make decisions in their favour. Gift hampers on festive occasions, entertainment, and personal favours big and small are just a few of countless social lubricants which such people use to ingratiate themselves to MPs and make you obligated to them.

Friday, October 02, 2015

Media statement
by DAP ADUN for Kampung Tunku Lau Weng San on 2nd October 2015 in
Petaling Jaya:

Recent remarks made by the newly appointed Communications and Multimedia
Minister, Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak, in responding to statement by the DAP
Parliamentary Leader, Sdr Lim Kit Siang on issues of slow internet speed and
coverage highlighted by a recent report released by content delivery network
services firm Akamai Technologies Inc., does not help fellow Malaysians to
understand how his Ministry will overcome the various shortcomings that our
country is currently facing in providing faster, wider and cheaper internet
services to Malaysians.

When the Minister is responding to issues, he is expected to inform the
people what are the ongoing action plans that have been and will be taken by
the authority, notably the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission
(MCMC). Instead, Salleh’s blogposts are more rhetorical than factual although
he admitted that Malaysia is lagging behind than many Asian countries in terms
of average internet speed and coverages, including nations like Sri Lanka and
Thailand, something which he cannot deny anyway.

This is what Salleh Said Keruak said: “Lim Kit Siang just talks about
speed. Malaysia’s focus is speed, coverage and affordability. We want to ensure
that by 2020 at least 95% of Malaysians will have access to the Internet. And
we also want to ensure that at least 50% of urban areas and 20% of rural areas
have broadband speeds of 100 Mbps.”

Let us be frank with Salleh: Firstly, Malaysia is
neither developing fast enough in terms of internet speed, coverage and
affordability. Secondly, Malaysians are not interested on how bad we are
compared to other countries. Indeed, we are saddened and disappointed when
Malaysia is ranked behind Sri Lanka and Thailand. Thirdly, do not compare
Malaysia with some other third world countries and tell Malaysians how better
we are. Race to the top, not to the bottom. Fourthly, as Minister, tell
Malaysians what you are going to do to give Malaysians faster, wider and
cheaper internet connection.

I would like to refer the Minister to an article
entitled “Lower broadband rates may be a pipe dream” written by Ng Wai Mun in Focus
Malaysia dated 28th Feb 2015, that the Malaysian Communications and
Multimedia Commission (MCMC) chairman Datuk Seri Dr Halim Shafie had been
reported as saying "MCMC will be carrying out a review of retail rates and
will work together with the industry to develop broadband packages for the
long-term benefit of end-users."

The report
further says that various research studies have shown there is a strong
correlation between broadband speed and take-up with the magnitude of a
country's gross domestic product (GDP) growth. It also says that the 2012
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) report on the "impact of
broadband on the economy" that an increase of 10% in broadband penetration
will contribute 0.7% points to GDP growth.

The current
broadband take-up rate is relatively low because of high rates charged by the
telecommunications operators. Consumers pay high prices for slow connection
speed. For example, Singapore's Singtel offers 1 Gbps at S$55 and S$100. In
contrast, a 5 MBps broadband plan for a household in Malaysia cost RM150 and
above. More businesses are embracing the internet as platform to expand their
business but failure to provide such logistic support will retard economic
growth.

Last but not
least, the Minister should also explain to Malaysians what the government have
been doing with Universal Service Provision Fund (USP Fund). The Universal
Service Provision Fund (USP Fund) was established under the provision of
Section 204 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998 which is controlled
and operated by MCMC.

According to 2008 MCMC’s annual report on USP Fund, the fund serves sole
purpose of implementing network facilities, network services and applications
services in the underserved areas and communities. All licensees except for
Content Applications Services Provider (CASP) license holders, whose weighted
net revenue derived from the designated services exceeds Minimum Revenue Threshold
of RM2 million for the previous calendar year shall contribute 6% of their
weighted net revenue to the USP Fund.

It is sad and disappointing that the latest MCMC’s annual report on USP
is not available online. So, my fundamental question to the Minister, besides
what he needs to answer Sdr Lim Kit Siang, is what has happened to the billions
of ringgit MCMC collected from licensees in the name of USP since 2013? Would
he care to give us an honest answer?

Hi,
My name is Lau Weng San, DAP Assemblyperson for Kampung Tunku, Petaling Jaya. The upcoming Selangor State Legislative Assembly will commence on the 30th October 2015 and the heart of the debate this round will be the Selangor State Government budget for the year 2016.
As usual, each Assemblyperson will be tabling a total of twenty questions, ten questions for oral replies and another ten for written replies to the Executive. The deadline to submit these questions is 9th October 2015. Most Assemblypersons will be drafting their questions, limited by 40 words each, by themselves. In the past, some of us have also put up announcement in social media asking the public to contribute questions or issues for us to raise in the sitting.
I am thinking of doing this exercise a little bit different this time, and that is the reason why I am doing this short video, with the hope that it will reach out to more people. Bear in mind, I can only ask questions related to the administration of the state government, issues like police, hospitals, 1MDB or schools etc are under the Federal government. So if you have an issue or question, email me at lauwengsan@gmail.com before 8th October. I will collect all the questions and issues, rank them according priority and draft a question on it before the deadline.
Thank you.
Regards,
Lau Weng San
ADUN Kampung Tunku.

Thursday, October 01, 2015

The Federal Government wants us to follow the laws all the times,
They want us to pay our fines and taxes on time,
When we want them to explain something, they say no time,
When we want them to do something, they say it is not the time,
So, if you want to change them, now is the time!